When I read a question that I think is perfectly reasonable, but which sufficient others have voted to close, obviously I can (and do) disagree and vote to reopen, but what's the best practice on vengeance?

My first reaction is to see the list of those responsible and to head off like a one user posse and to go over some of their contributions with a strict eye and to look for any reason to vote them down or edit them to improve. But this doesn't seem within the spirit of the trilogy.

I should be grown up and just move on, after all it probably wasn't my question, I might not even have answered it and there are hundreds of others to get to work on, but if I feel positive enough to vote up a question that someone else has voted to close, it's a human reaction to want to visit some furious anger on those responsible for closing it.

What methods to y'all employ to, just, get over it?

Edit:

My basis for this is that if I can't agree with someone on something, i.e. that they are wrong, then what else are they wrong about and isn't it my duty to help the community by highlighting this? Obviously just moving on is relatively easily said (and done).

7 Answers
7

The best thing to do is close your browser and get some work done. If you get so offended by a close vote on somebody else's question that you think you need retribution, then you've got too much personally invested and need to take a step back.

The second-best thing to do is go gain some reputation by answering other questions. "The best revenge is living well."

There's a certain irony to this, given my current Meta name (which is itself a joke), but if you feel the need for vengeance, you have the wrong mindset.

Under no circumstance should you go out looking for vengeance on someone. The bottom line is that reasonable people can disagree. Disagreements are not always spiteful in nature. There are people who will be wrong, and people who will be right, and the truth is that in many cases there merest small circumstances will be the differentiating factor.

On the Trilogy, all posts should be evaluated based on the content of the post, and not the individual writing it. Period.

"If I can't agree with someone on something, then what else are they wrong about and isn't it my duty to help the community by highlighting this? Obviously just moving on is relatively easily said (and done)."